A move to the Olympic Stadium would give West Ham a capacity of 80,000. Photograph: Rebecca Naden/PA

West Ham United's new owners today reignited the debate about the future of the Olympic Stadium in Stratford by signalling their intention to occupy it after the 2012 Games, in a move welcomed by Tory politicians and local councillors.

David Sullivan who, with David Gold, took control of West Ham in a deal that values the club at £105m, said they are "hoping to persuade the government" they should be allowed to move just over two miles to the £537m stadium.

Citing the precendent of Manchester City's move following the Commonwealth Games, any deal to take up tenancy at the Olympic Stadium could radically overhaul West Ham's financial model and enable them to turbo-charge revenues by boosting capacity to 55,000 and ­giving them a ready-made new home with excellent transport links. It could immediately make their £50m investment look a wise one, particularly as the club could sell Upton Park for redevelopment.

Sullivan's statement of intent is likely to be the opening salvo in a long running negotiation between the club and the Olympic Park Legacy Company, effectively a joint-venture between the government and the London Mayor, that is responsible for devising an economically feasible masterplan for the area and the venues in it.

"Any legacy solution for the Olympic Stadium has to be commercially viable and that probably means a Premier League football club alongside its athletics use," the shadow sports minister, Hugh ­Robertson, said today.

The outcome will have ramifications not only for the government's delivery of a 2012 legacy, but also England's bid to host the 2018 World Cup. Karren Brady, West Ham's new vice-chairman, also has an advisory role on the 2018 bid team.

But several contentious issues remain, including the question of who will pick up the estimated £100m tab for converting the stadium into a permanentPremier League football ground with all the hospitality, catering and retail requirements that entails. The stadium was designed to have all catering kiosks and merchandising stalls housed in temporary pods on its perimeter rather than built into the undercroft.

A second stumbling block will be the fact that Olympic organisers are unlikely to countenance the removal of the running track and will require promises about community use. A school, a National Skills Academy and a branch of the English Institute for Sport are all in line to move in.

The Olympic Park Legacy Company said yesterday it was keeping all options open ahead of a report expected in the next two months, overseen by the chair Baroness Ford and chief executive Andrew Altman. But Ford has repeatedly expressed enthusiasm for at least seriously examining the feasibility of the project and sees no reason why it cannot combine football with a running track. The stadium is more intimate than the cavernous bowls of previous Games, with seats banked more steeply.

There is undoubtedly a shift in mood. The original idea of scaling the stadium back to 25,000 seats fitted with the bid ethos of leaving no white elephants in 2005. But as time has gone on, more of those involved have begun to question the wisdom of building a landmark stadium and immediately dismantling it.

The Olympics minister, Tessa Jowell, last year appeared to close off the debate about the future of the stadium after negotiations with a range of potential partners, including West Ham, Leyton Orient and Wasps, broke down. But on her appointment Ford said she wanted to revisit the issue.

Newham Council is also keen, believing it would help the area through a tricky post-Games spell and make the Park immediately feel like a well used destination with an attachment to its community, not to mention the economic spin-offs for local businesses. Newham's mayor, Sir Robin Wales, a West Ham season ticket holder, said yesterday: "This is great news and augurs well. We have always argued the Olympic stadium deserves a top flight football team after London 2012.

"In my eyes there is only one obvious choice – and that's the Hammers. Allowing the club to move into this iconic ­setting would ensure a fitting legacy for the stadium."

Sullivan's suggestion that the athletics track could be removed and rehoused at Upton Park – unlikely not least because it would prevent West Ham from selling the valuable real estate – could anger Olympic officials, who have repeatedly insisted that retaining an athletics legacy for the stadium is of paramount importance.

For the club, it could transform its finances. More accessible to its traditional fan base to the east and the north of its East End home, with unrivalled transport links and a likely 55,000 capacity, the additional match-day income could enable it to compete on a level playing field with Arsenal and Spurs, who by then hope to have also moved into a new stadium.